Of course the US and China should have long and intense negotiations. One of the main problems, however, is Trumps's insulting rhetoric and and mafia boss-like style. He seems to be doing everything possible to fail to communicate with the Chinese (and Koreans and Japanese and...) by turning international negotiations into a verbal form of warfare. Japan and India are more vulnerable, but if they were as confident as China, they might very well act in the same way. And, in the case of China, Trump seems to just ignore the fact that China has a grievance against the US for militarily virtually grabbing and possessing Taiwan after 1945, just when 50 years of Japanese occupation had finally ended. To the Chinese, since 1945 the US has acted as Imperial Japan's successor, forcing the separation of Taiwan from the rest of China. (In 1959, when the Chinese attempted to take back Taiwan, the US threatened to nuke China.) Imagine if China had invaded Puerto Rico in 1945 and were still there. How would the US react? Economics and geopolitics can't be simply and cleanly separated, as Trump should know. He is hurting his own chances of success. If you were Chinese, how could you trust anything he says? Only respectful, low-key, private or mostly-private negotiations will succeed with China. To East Asians, Trump's theatrics look rather barbaric. He needs to refine his approach.
No, China is not about to implode, just as the Russian military is not about to implode. There are many advantages to lowering one's population, as leaders in China and Japan are both aware. In China the education rate is going up and up; and a moderately large but highly educated and motivated population is more productive than a huge but moderately educated population. The workforce in China is changing rapidly, and innovation and rational planning are changing Chinese society and economy equally rapidly. Meanwhile, Trump wants to slash US educational budgets and government aid to cutting-edge industries and aid for R&D generally. Astronomical educational costs in the US are a TRUE national crisis that Trump is ignoring -- to his literal peril. Meanwhile the government-supported Chinese education system is producing more and more innovative experts in science, engineering, and mathematics. The US will fall further and further behind East Asia in terms of cutting-edge industries that offer high wages. The cost of education in the US is depriving literally millions of capable young people of a chance to prepare for the economy of the near future, and yet Trump (and most other US pols) regard aid for education simply as a cost to be reduced. And other factors, such as the soaring costs of medical care, will be a significant drag on American industry and keep it from competing with other economies. Japan, S. Korea, and Taiwan all have magnificent national health care insurance systems supported by big business that improve worker health and keep operating costs lower for industry. Even in mainland China, Xi has made the creation of a similar national health insurance program and other aspects of the social safety net a priority. People who predict Chinese implosion forget that China is in the process of changing significantly every year. Industrialization is still a relatively new experience for them, so the level of change and innovation is quite high.
Tariffs are not yet an "emergency" for the US. I submit that the extraordinarily low rise in wages for people on Main street since around 1970 is a much more significant emergency. Efficiency has risen steadily, but wages haven't kept up. This suggests that employers have been making the suppression of wages a major goal. Offshoring is one way of suppressing wages, and once employers go offshore and establish complex business and supply networks, it will not be efficient or economical for them to move back to the US. The main problem is how to reindustrialize at home, not how to punish foreign countries or force offshoring companies to return. New companies will not just spring up like mushrooms in the US, especially if inflation increases because of new tariffs. How can new US companies produce cheaply enough without a national reindustrialization program like the national space program that was set up after the Soviets launched Sputnik and other satellites? Full employment is even more important than satellites, so why are Trump and other pols neglecting this emergency? Trump, where's the beef? Where's your red-blooded, multi-pronged program for reindustrializing America? Just playing with tariffs won't do the job. After all, given that wages are suppressed now in the US, it can be argued that cheap imports are a necessity for tens of millions of Main Street American to live a half-decent life. If these cheap goods disappear or become more expensive, this is nothing but a super-austerity program in disguise. The Rust Belt will get rustier and JD's "hillbilly" natal town will get even poorer. Trump, who has never tasted austerity himself, wants Main Street, which he claims to love, to just take their bitter medicine -- the degradation of their lifestyles and their ability to live decent lives -- when inflation (and possible recession) come. By concentrating on symptoms (trade imbalances) instead of the disease (wage suppression, financialization, and stagflation), Trump is betraying ordinary Americans. Trump also ignores the fact that most American recessions come from private debt, not governmental debt. For example, the 2007-08 great recession was caused mainly by people being unable to repay their housing mortgages. By concentrating on the federal deficit and doing little or nothing to reduce dangerously increasing private debt due to chronic wage stagnation, Trump is deflecting attention from the real economic danger of another serious recession, a recession which would hurt Main Street, not the fat cats who are Trump's donors.
In the late 19th century the US stimulated industrialization by providing public utilities for workers, who could depend on these utilities and get by on the cheap wages they received. In other words, the US government realized that it had to help out if American industrialization was to succeed. This was an excellent policy that succeeded in the long run, despite many problems. But today, America's ruling class, including, apparently, Trump, is more short-sighted. and seems to care mostly about instant or near-instant profits. If there is not a change and a new emphasis on systematically using the federal budget not for endless wars but for government investments in reindustrialization, Trump's praiseworthy attempt to reindustrialize will probably fail. Trump now boasts that he will raise the US military budget above a trillion dollars! Isn't this complete hypocrisy? Mr. Trump, reduce private debt first, then government debt. There are various ways to do this fairly. Trump isn't living up to his potential.
I think we need to recognize that China would not be in the position. It is in economically and technologically if it hadn’t been involved in, probably the biggest organized industrial espionage for the last 40 years.
They have literally stolen everything from the western nations to jumpstart themselves to get where they are now they didn’t get there or legally . They don’t recognize anybody’s intellectual properties. They don’t recognize Pat infringement or anything else. They refuse to pay royalties damages, or any monies to those who invented the things they stole.
I have read I believe this may have come from David Stockman that China is about $50 trillion in debt. Everything over there right now is probably a house of cards. They’re socialism/capitalism approach is a failure and a lot of ways., now they have a serious demographic problem with an aging society and no younger generation replacement.
In addition, I have read an analysis that tells us that by 2030 there will no longer be the wage price advantage in Chinese manufacturing. Their people are asking and demanding higher wages and benefits also. So all of the financial offshore manufacturing and everything else will not be as economically viable as it has been , then what will China do?
I think China is going to have to make a deal. Trump will have to compromise some, but they will make a deal of some sort and that deal will include a devaluation of the Yuan currency. Drop may even value the dollar or something to get an advantage.
I would say the next two or three weeks are going to be critical.
Right now, people are watching the value of their assets drop And that is going to end up translating into lots of political support unless Trump somehow is able to turn things around to get what he wants.
How do you think the US industrialized? I don't know about Canada, but the US stole and stole and spied and spied on European factories, especially in Britain and Germany. Starting as early as the 1820s, thousands and thousand s of New Englanders armed with pens and lots of note paper made "study" trips to Manchester and elsewhere and made detailed descriptions and diagrams of everything they had observed. Judging from photographs, the early mills in Massachusetts looked a lot like the mills of Manchester, etc., etc. Of course there was a lot of American innovation, too, just as there is in China now. This activity continued throughout the 19th century, when the US industry was in its developmental stage.
The foundational problem with the US and EU is that we have been too affluent for too long and recent economic policies have not allowed recessions to weed out inefficiencies and bad habits. Hence we have become systemically dysfunctional and living beyond our means for far too long. This has to change or collapse is inevitable. NOTHING CHANGES UNTIL THE ENVIRONMENT CHANGES. Trump is now pushing the planet into a hard clash with reality. Every nation must now roll up its sleeves and face the hardship of adapting to the new paradigm. As long as we avoid WW3, this will lift all boats.
Your astute comment echoes the Duran guys’ recent discussion of the tariffs. They use the term “business cycle” to refer to the ups and downs of the economy, recessions being a part of the cycle - if they’re allowed to happen!
" In short, I have argued, the most realistic path forward regarding conflict avoidance would be for Iran to negotiate in good faith regarding the verifiable disposition of its excess nuclear enrichment capability. "
noting: --- In 2003, Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi agreed to eliminate his country's weapons of mass destruction program, including a decades-old nuclear weapons program. ---
But isn't this exactly what Libya did - and they paid dearly for it.
That is where I disagree with Scott Ritter - I think he misses the big picture.
Not really. What Iran has that Libya didn't have is 1) a huge and advanced offensive ballistic missile capability, to go with additional cruise missile and drone capabilities, 2) advanced AD capabilities that are being regularly upgraded with Russian help, 3) support from powerful partners (Russia and China).
Unlike Libya, Iran is not now and will not in the future be defenseless if it renounces enrichment beyond civilian needs.
"In speeches, Gaddafi often outlined his plan to create a new united Africa with its own currency, an army to defend the continent, and a single passport.
He wanted to introduce a gold dinar to back African currencies, thus freeing them from the dollar standard."
Many have conjectured that his desired African monetary union was the reason he was taken out even after his concessions to the West.
Iran of course has a parallel to this with it being a BRICS member and the heart of the INSTC. I do not blame them for being VERY careful in any negotiations. And it is not a mystery why Russia and China would be in close consultation with them.
Good response, Mark. I think you have delineatedthe difference between the two countries and the siutation in which they find themselves in. Gaddafi responded from a position of weakness.
4, Location location location. Iran is at the cross roads of Major Trade Routes. A very important strategic negotiation position, which involves 2 of the 3 Great Powers.
Libya gave up its nuclear weapons program in the hope of gaining economic benefits. Their nuke program was not a deterrent to Western attacks and they had no other deterrent forces.
Iran will retain strong deterrent forces--assuming they don't give them away, which I strongly doubt.
I understand what you are saying and agree in much regard however
I wonder why would the US want them to ?
The US apparently ( per Scott Ritter ) knows Iran has not done anything to forward their nuclear position in years - they know Iran has no nuclear weapon and they know well that Israel has a nuclear weapon.
So why is US and Israel so interested in Iran giving up their nuclear possibilities ? Whilst Israel has known nuclear bombs and several of them, and there appears no interest in that at all ?
eg: Has the US even sought to limit the Number of Israeli nuclear bombs ?
Or can Israel have as many as they want ?
I opine, When someone has a deep interest in something like this, one has to wonder what they are planning / what their goals are.
Israel seeks to be the hegemon in the Middle East and to do so they cannot be paired off with another nuclear armed opponent. they require US backing to accomplish this and the prize is the oil and gas with the cherry on top the Gaza Riviera. Bringing more wealth to the owners of Israel.
On the contrary, Ritter has been vociferously blaming Iran for causing a crisis. Ritter claims that Iran is enriching to 60%, which he says is far beyond any civilian need. No doubt Iran will claim that it is responding to threats coming from another country with an illegal nuke program--Israel.
On the contrary, Ritter has been vociferously blaming Iran for causing a crisis. Ritter claims that Iran is enriching to 60%, which he says is far beyond any civilian need. No doubt Iran will claim that it is responding to threats coming from another country with an illegal nuke program--Israel.
Where Israel is apparently innocent of crisis by stealing US intelligence and creating a number ( unknown number ) of fully functional nuclear weapons
Clearly Iran will claim it is responding to threats from Israel I believe most believe they in fact are
I can't name One Treaty Israel has not broken Nor One of Several US resolutions Israel has not ignored
Whether that be in Gaza Syria Iran Egypt etc...
If I were Iran and I was asked to give up all nuclear related activities, I would think US were insane to ask without clarifying the position in Israel
The Houthis seemed pretty wedded to blocking the Red Sea as long as the Zionists continue genociding the Palis. Maybe Trump will finally lose patience and bang the Zionists' heads together
Of course the US and China should have long and intense negotiations. One of the main problems, however, is Trumps's insulting rhetoric and and mafia boss-like style. He seems to be doing everything possible to fail to communicate with the Chinese (and Koreans and Japanese and...) by turning international negotiations into a verbal form of warfare. Japan and India are more vulnerable, but if they were as confident as China, they might very well act in the same way. And, in the case of China, Trump seems to just ignore the fact that China has a grievance against the US for militarily virtually grabbing and possessing Taiwan after 1945, just when 50 years of Japanese occupation had finally ended. To the Chinese, since 1945 the US has acted as Imperial Japan's successor, forcing the separation of Taiwan from the rest of China. (In 1959, when the Chinese attempted to take back Taiwan, the US threatened to nuke China.) Imagine if China had invaded Puerto Rico in 1945 and were still there. How would the US react? Economics and geopolitics can't be simply and cleanly separated, as Trump should know. He is hurting his own chances of success. If you were Chinese, how could you trust anything he says? Only respectful, low-key, private or mostly-private negotiations will succeed with China. To East Asians, Trump's theatrics look rather barbaric. He needs to refine his approach.
No, China is not about to implode, just as the Russian military is not about to implode. There are many advantages to lowering one's population, as leaders in China and Japan are both aware. In China the education rate is going up and up; and a moderately large but highly educated and motivated population is more productive than a huge but moderately educated population. The workforce in China is changing rapidly, and innovation and rational planning are changing Chinese society and economy equally rapidly. Meanwhile, Trump wants to slash US educational budgets and government aid to cutting-edge industries and aid for R&D generally. Astronomical educational costs in the US are a TRUE national crisis that Trump is ignoring -- to his literal peril. Meanwhile the government-supported Chinese education system is producing more and more innovative experts in science, engineering, and mathematics. The US will fall further and further behind East Asia in terms of cutting-edge industries that offer high wages. The cost of education in the US is depriving literally millions of capable young people of a chance to prepare for the economy of the near future, and yet Trump (and most other US pols) regard aid for education simply as a cost to be reduced. And other factors, such as the soaring costs of medical care, will be a significant drag on American industry and keep it from competing with other economies. Japan, S. Korea, and Taiwan all have magnificent national health care insurance systems supported by big business that improve worker health and keep operating costs lower for industry. Even in mainland China, Xi has made the creation of a similar national health insurance program and other aspects of the social safety net a priority. People who predict Chinese implosion forget that China is in the process of changing significantly every year. Industrialization is still a relatively new experience for them, so the level of change and innovation is quite high.
Tariffs are not yet an "emergency" for the US. I submit that the extraordinarily low rise in wages for people on Main street since around 1970 is a much more significant emergency. Efficiency has risen steadily, but wages haven't kept up. This suggests that employers have been making the suppression of wages a major goal. Offshoring is one way of suppressing wages, and once employers go offshore and establish complex business and supply networks, it will not be efficient or economical for them to move back to the US. The main problem is how to reindustrialize at home, not how to punish foreign countries or force offshoring companies to return. New companies will not just spring up like mushrooms in the US, especially if inflation increases because of new tariffs. How can new US companies produce cheaply enough without a national reindustrialization program like the national space program that was set up after the Soviets launched Sputnik and other satellites? Full employment is even more important than satellites, so why are Trump and other pols neglecting this emergency? Trump, where's the beef? Where's your red-blooded, multi-pronged program for reindustrializing America? Just playing with tariffs won't do the job. After all, given that wages are suppressed now in the US, it can be argued that cheap imports are a necessity for tens of millions of Main Street American to live a half-decent life. If these cheap goods disappear or become more expensive, this is nothing but a super-austerity program in disguise. The Rust Belt will get rustier and JD's "hillbilly" natal town will get even poorer. Trump, who has never tasted austerity himself, wants Main Street, which he claims to love, to just take their bitter medicine -- the degradation of their lifestyles and their ability to live decent lives -- when inflation (and possible recession) come. By concentrating on symptoms (trade imbalances) instead of the disease (wage suppression, financialization, and stagflation), Trump is betraying ordinary Americans. Trump also ignores the fact that most American recessions come from private debt, not governmental debt. For example, the 2007-08 great recession was caused mainly by people being unable to repay their housing mortgages. By concentrating on the federal deficit and doing little or nothing to reduce dangerously increasing private debt due to chronic wage stagnation, Trump is deflecting attention from the real economic danger of another serious recession, a recession which would hurt Main Street, not the fat cats who are Trump's donors.
In the late 19th century the US stimulated industrialization by providing public utilities for workers, who could depend on these utilities and get by on the cheap wages they received. In other words, the US government realized that it had to help out if American industrialization was to succeed. This was an excellent policy that succeeded in the long run, despite many problems. But today, America's ruling class, including, apparently, Trump, is more short-sighted. and seems to care mostly about instant or near-instant profits. If there is not a change and a new emphasis on systematically using the federal budget not for endless wars but for government investments in reindustrialization, Trump's praiseworthy attempt to reindustrialize will probably fail. Trump now boasts that he will raise the US military budget above a trillion dollars! Isn't this complete hypocrisy? Mr. Trump, reduce private debt first, then government debt. There are various ways to do this fairly. Trump isn't living up to his potential.
I think we need to recognize that China would not be in the position. It is in economically and technologically if it hadn’t been involved in, probably the biggest organized industrial espionage for the last 40 years.
They have literally stolen everything from the western nations to jumpstart themselves to get where they are now they didn’t get there or legally . They don’t recognize anybody’s intellectual properties. They don’t recognize Pat infringement or anything else. They refuse to pay royalties damages, or any monies to those who invented the things they stole.
I have read I believe this may have come from David Stockman that China is about $50 trillion in debt. Everything over there right now is probably a house of cards. They’re socialism/capitalism approach is a failure and a lot of ways., now they have a serious demographic problem with an aging society and no younger generation replacement.
In addition, I have read an analysis that tells us that by 2030 there will no longer be the wage price advantage in Chinese manufacturing. Their people are asking and demanding higher wages and benefits also. So all of the financial offshore manufacturing and everything else will not be as economically viable as it has been , then what will China do?
I think China is going to have to make a deal. Trump will have to compromise some, but they will make a deal of some sort and that deal will include a devaluation of the Yuan currency. Drop may even value the dollar or something to get an advantage.
I would say the next two or three weeks are going to be critical.
Right now, people are watching the value of their assets drop And that is going to end up translating into lots of political support unless Trump somehow is able to turn things around to get what he wants.
How do you think the US industrialized? I don't know about Canada, but the US stole and stole and spied and spied on European factories, especially in Britain and Germany. Starting as early as the 1820s, thousands and thousand s of New Englanders armed with pens and lots of note paper made "study" trips to Manchester and elsewhere and made detailed descriptions and diagrams of everything they had observed. Judging from photographs, the early mills in Massachusetts looked a lot like the mills of Manchester, etc., etc. Of course there was a lot of American innovation, too, just as there is in China now. This activity continued throughout the 19th century, when the US industry was in its developmental stage.
Very true, and Britain basically tried to colonize the rest of the world as the market for their manufactured goods. It didn't work of course.
Makes sense to me, and that's what Trump has, in effect, told them.
The only meaningful rabbit that Trump could pull would be to bring back the dead.
We traded decadent communists for genocidal maniacs.
One disease for another - both fatal
The foundational problem with the US and EU is that we have been too affluent for too long and recent economic policies have not allowed recessions to weed out inefficiencies and bad habits. Hence we have become systemically dysfunctional and living beyond our means for far too long. This has to change or collapse is inevitable. NOTHING CHANGES UNTIL THE ENVIRONMENT CHANGES. Trump is now pushing the planet into a hard clash with reality. Every nation must now roll up its sleeves and face the hardship of adapting to the new paradigm. As long as we avoid WW3, this will lift all boats.
Some nations will roll up their sleeves; others will disappear further down the rabbit holes. Many of the latter nations will be in Europe.
Your astute comment echoes the Duran guys’ recent discussion of the tariffs. They use the term “business cycle” to refer to the ups and downs of the economy, recessions being a part of the cycle - if they’re allowed to happen!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-WtlnsUlDus
Here's to hoping it also impacts or rubs off on those in government in the former great state of Illinois. Well, kinda, once, sorta, great state.
The Land of Lincoln, after all!
We've got fat boy JB.
Left out the tsunami torpedo with a 100 Meg warhead.
One would do it.
Trump is a showman. Putting on a show, any opportunity.
Moving an attack force of very expensive airplanes and ships and subs,
to a Tiny Island is poor military, but great showmanship.
One of RussianLarge Hypersonic Missiles,
could sink the entire island and everything on it.
Evidence that its a show to intimidate,
much as Isreal would love a war with Iran, USFighting it.
Isn't that what we all voted for?
Putin has a PHD in Economics. Brought back Russia from bankrupt 90,s
Trump recognizes Putin as a smart guy. Maybe Trump could benefit from Putins experience.
Beats the hell out of WW3.
Putin did what Trump aspires to: made his country great again.
Mark, this is most excellent. Thank you.
The big question, really, is what about the Houthis and other Iranian regional partners.
.
" In short, I have argued, the most realistic path forward regarding conflict avoidance would be for Iran to negotiate in good faith regarding the verifiable disposition of its excess nuclear enrichment capability. "
noting: --- In 2003, Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi agreed to eliminate his country's weapons of mass destruction program, including a decades-old nuclear weapons program. ---
But isn't this exactly what Libya did - and they paid dearly for it.
That is where I disagree with Scott Ritter - I think he misses the big picture.
.
Not really. What Iran has that Libya didn't have is 1) a huge and advanced offensive ballistic missile capability, to go with additional cruise missile and drone capabilities, 2) advanced AD capabilities that are being regularly upgraded with Russian help, 3) support from powerful partners (Russia and China).
Unlike Libya, Iran is not now and will not in the future be defenseless if it renounces enrichment beyond civilian needs.
There was also this:
"In speeches, Gaddafi often outlined his plan to create a new united Africa with its own currency, an army to defend the continent, and a single passport.
He wanted to introduce a gold dinar to back African currencies, thus freeing them from the dollar standard."
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/africa/african-intellectuals-remember-late-muammar-gaddafi-as-pan-african/2397444
Many have conjectured that his desired African monetary union was the reason he was taken out even after his concessions to the West.
Iran of course has a parallel to this with it being a BRICS member and the heart of the INSTC. I do not blame them for being VERY careful in any negotiations. And it is not a mystery why Russia and China would be in close consultation with them.
Good response, Mark. I think you have delineatedthe difference between the two countries and the siutation in which they find themselves in. Gaddafi responded from a position of weakness.
4, Location location location. Iran is at the cross roads of Major Trade Routes. A very important strategic negotiation position, which involves 2 of the 3 Great Powers.
Good point.
" a key lesson from the Libyan experience is that trusting the United States’ long-term commitment to stand by its deals can be a fatal mistake. "
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/giving-the-bomb-revisiting-libyas-decision-to-dismantle-its-nuclear-program
Libya gave up its nuclear weapons program in the hope of gaining economic benefits. Their nuke program was not a deterrent to Western attacks and they had no other deterrent forces.
Iran will retain strong deterrent forces--assuming they don't give them away, which I strongly doubt.
I understand what you are saying and agree in much regard however
I wonder why would the US want them to ?
The US apparently ( per Scott Ritter ) knows Iran has not done anything to forward their nuclear position in years - they know Iran has no nuclear weapon and they know well that Israel has a nuclear weapon.
So why is US and Israel so interested in Iran giving up their nuclear possibilities ? Whilst Israel has known nuclear bombs and several of them, and there appears no interest in that at all ?
eg: Has the US even sought to limit the Number of Israeli nuclear bombs ?
Or can Israel have as many as they want ?
I opine, When someone has a deep interest in something like this, one has to wonder what they are planning / what their goals are.
Israel seeks to be the hegemon in the Middle East and to do so they cannot be paired off with another nuclear armed opponent. they require US backing to accomplish this and the prize is the oil and gas with the cherry on top the Gaza Riviera. Bringing more wealth to the owners of Israel.
On the contrary, Ritter has been vociferously blaming Iran for causing a crisis. Ritter claims that Iran is enriching to 60%, which he says is far beyond any civilian need. No doubt Iran will claim that it is responding to threats coming from another country with an illegal nuke program--Israel.
On the contrary, Ritter has been vociferously blaming Iran for causing a crisis. Ritter claims that Iran is enriching to 60%, which he says is far beyond any civilian need. No doubt Iran will claim that it is responding to threats coming from another country with an illegal nuke program--Israel.
And that is part of where I disagree with Ritter
How is Iran causing a crisis by enriching to 60 %
Where Israel is apparently innocent of crisis by stealing US intelligence and creating a number ( unknown number ) of fully functional nuclear weapons
Clearly Iran will claim it is responding to threats from Israel I believe most believe they in fact are
I can't name One Treaty Israel has not broken Nor One of Several US resolutions Israel has not ignored
Whether that be in Gaza Syria Iran Egypt etc...
If I were Iran and I was asked to give up all nuclear related activities, I would think US were insane to ask without clarifying the position in Israel
The Houthis seemed pretty wedded to blocking the Red Sea as long as the Zionists continue genociding the Palis. Maybe Trump will finally lose patience and bang the Zionists' heads together
JFK tried that and look what it got him.
side agreement of indirect talks perhaps?
China already controls the import of us films, and uses that control to influence Hollywood.
There is a reason no film similar to 7 years in Tibet has been made after that films release in 1997.
Agreed. that's a bunch of hype on someone's part.